Andy_P

The cuts that saw an increase in the playing budget last season?

I think because there is a structure, a shared responsibility and a strategy concerning the signing of players that would continue regardless of who the manager is. The aim of trying to recruit players for free, or for relatively modest sums, and in time sell them on at some profit is well known. To deliver those players is Martin Foyle (Gary Owers I think) our Director of Recruitment and his team of scouts in combination with the manager. The manager will of course dictate a preference, I would very much assume would have final say but I think anyone in the manager's role at Motherwell will have taken the role in the full knowledge, and will have to invest fully in what is expected from them when it comes to player recruitment.

It remains to be seen what shape the squad is in in once things kick off but as it stands there seems as much continuity and hopefully an assurance of what level they are at, for as long as I can remember. As is stands from a team that was third we've had a not far off a like-for-like change in goal. We've replaced a experienced centre-half that had a couple of seasons in the top flight, with a younger centre-half who has had a couple of seasons experience in the top flight. O'Hara is back and Turnbull will be like a new player. If Long re-signs then it's a pretty settled looking team. Of course the transfer window hasn't even opened yet so....

I can't claim to know the full process involved in a player signing a contract and it getting to the point where it is legally binding but it would seem not to have been fully concluded otherwise Richard surely wouldn't have been able to join St Mirren or would he have some kind of case against the club for reneging on agreed terms. It remains to be seen whether the club will choose to respond and we may be in a better position then to judge if Motherwell have acted if not illegally, but in poor spirit, but boot on the other foot it won't have been the first time a player has committed to the club but then made a last minute decision to change their mind and do something different leaving the club high and dry. Time will tell I suppose.

I'm not sure there's quite the evidence to suggest that is common place on how things are undertaken. Indeed we only have Tait's word things went down as they did in this particular instance. But what we do know is that a number of supporters were keen for the club to furlough players as soon as was possible to reduce the expected losses resulting from Covid-19. Seeking to renegotiate as yet uncompleted contracts to take account of that unprecedented situation is another. And let's not forget too that in the same batch of out of contract players a short term contract was offered to an injured player in Charles Dunne who had yet to regain fitness as was the case the season before with Craig Tanner when in both cases they could quite easily have said thank you and goodbye.

At the current moment in time we're a more attractive option than St Mirren I'd agree but I wouldn't go so far as to say choosing them over us is insanity, particularly if you are going to get a similar or slightly better deal. It has already been rightly stated the competition there is in our midfield. Remember it was about three or four months before O'Hara got anywhere near our starting eleven (admittedly he was injured for a spell). McGinn via Hibs is now one of the hottest properties in midfield the country. Lewis Morgan won a move to Celtic. Stevie Mallan moved from St Mirren to an English Championship side so there's a pathway to progression there too. Kilmarnock and ourselves even following the second place finishes illustrate how quickly the provincial teams can go up or down the table. Whilst ofcourse they cannot offer European football I don't think the gap is anywhere near big enough to suggest it would be insanity to go there.

I suppose there are several hundred thousand of pounds worth of reasons why even though McKinstry and McAlear barely kicked a ball in anger for the first team, so there's definitely a point. All they can do is develop players and hope that more of them go down the Scott and Turnbull route where a transfer fee will be achieved along as well as first team games rather than the McKinstry and McAlear route but even then if the players are of sufficient quality there will compensation fees and a further boost to the reputation of the club's Academy, which has its own benefits.

Absolutely. I don't know if anyone caught the Scottish Football Marketing Podcast where Grant Russell is interviewed. There's a discussion around the club's goal for a season and how that is communicated and returned to, again and again throughout the season with the successful results achieved from it. It is exactly the same with referencing the financial position.

They do them up to 5XL. I'm errr....told....

You're not wrong. But there some kind of UEFA regulation in European competition that apparently prevents it rather than it being done through choice if that offers some consolation.

At a guess I would think adult standard is just an adult whereas the family would be the adult +1 free in the Hunter and O'Donnell stands or the adult + 2 free in the Cooper deals.

Was it possibly the other way around? We went into the 2010'11 season with no sponsor and I think there was the option to latterly have the sponsor added. A good number, chose not to.

Bit belated possibly but any interest in a poll for your Player of the Year? I'll stick a handful of candidates as a starter, but if you want to nominate someone else just mention them in the thread and I'll get the name added,

I have absolutely no idea how good or bad Robinson's boy is but you don't need to delve very far at all to realise how many signings and appointments in football have been heavily influenced by direct or indirect relationships so, whilst a father signing his son is perhaps a bit more rare, in the respect of a player/manager getting a helping hand because of who they happen to know it isn't massively uncommon.

Fair enough. Happy to stand corrected.

Rohan Ferguson? Not that I know of. Are you maybe thinking of Darren O'Dea from earlier in the season? Ferguson I would have thought to be too young to foresake what could be a fairly promising playing career for a coaching job at this point.

I can't really contest of any of the cases of the departed players. Gillespie has been excellent. We got the replacement we anticipated for Carson, albeit it didn't quite happen in the anticipated manner and if he has got gig with an English Premiership side with whom he apparently has some emotional attachment, who can blame him for that? Would have been nice had we got a fee of course but a free transfer that has definitely been mutually beneficial. Hartley I think did well to play as much, and as well as he did last season but unless he's playing week in, week out he seemed to be taking longer and longer to get to his peak and with every injury. Interesting to see where the replacement comes from the injury prone Dunne? The mooted Lamie? Youngsters like Hussain or Devine? Whatever, I think Hartley's been a signing that has worked out pretty well for us over the piece and I wish him well. Tait is another who has delivered much more than might have been expected from someone plucked from the level he was with very little fan fare. It poses a question about the cover at both full-back positions but the assists he was initially renowned for began to dry up, his was pace going and he could only have played about a third of his games in his true position in the last eighteen months. I wouldn't have objected had he been offered another year but it's difficult to argue with the decision. Ilic and Manzinga going is no surprise both in terms of the financial climate and on what they produced in their season with us. There tends to be a bit griping about this type of signing when it doesn't work out but I have no issues with a signing or two like this coming in for cover and to take a bit of a punt on. Neither though added anything significantly. Livingstone re-signing last summer came as a little bit of a surprise so with no involvement this year his moving on isn't any surprise this year. Not sure if Ferguson was offered terms or not having already played a number of first team games before coming to us and then a full season out on loan I might have imagined the prospect of sitting as a number two would not be so attractive. Time will tell who comes in, or comes through to replace them I suppose.

I must admit I find it difficult to look back on that evening with as detached a manner as you have in your summary. Just thinking of that night gets my heart racing and that's before considering the potential repercussions for the very future of the club had we not retained our top flight status. It was an absorbing breathless night. The club's stance over the ticket allocation set a dogged tone that everybody ran with. Don't get me wrong the fear was palpable but there was a quiet determination. And the more the likes of Keevans dismissed our chances the greater that resolve grew. By the time we got out of Ibrox my legs were cut to ribbons with the celebrations, my face could have blended in with a Hearts top and my voice hoarse. Incomprehensible texts were going back and forward to family and friends unable to be there. The wave of relief and perhaps a degree of disbelief of what had happened. And yet a nagging doubt lingered. Ainsworth's chance to make it four and then them subsequently getting a goal back. They get the first goal back at Fir Park and it's all different. Suddenly they have the momentum and it becomes a different test of character. The next few days would be spent reminding myself of what we had done at Ibrox when they had tried to dominate us and of our ability to hit them on the break. It was still a long wait until Sunday. But that night. No, that'll live long in the memory. The game, the whole context. That's always going to be one I'll savour.

Stuart Elliott bottom left? Which if that is right would suggest the shirt was signed a wee bit after we after stopped wearing that kit.

I would say that they bring money into because they feel they have a duty to keep supporters informed where they possibly can in the knowledge that it's a fan owned club. Clearly they aren't going to reveal everything but I can't see that they try to inform supporters is a bad thing. Again I'll say just because people might not like what they're hearing doesn't mean it shouldn't be said. It's why you'll get a chairman's report every year when the figures are released. Why you know what sort of budget they have in comparison to others so you can put things in context on the pitch. And it isn't just negative stuff you get from them either. The clearing of historical debt was given a lot of coverage back in February for example. That brought days of coverage across the media about what had been achieved. Looking at the report that this discussion stemmed from and the social media releases in the last few days there is an appreciation that these issues will be felt across the country and not just at Motherwell, and loads of acknowledgement from Robinson and across social media of what has been achieved. I would suggest it would be more of an issue if they weren't giving an indication of where they believe things are. For I can absolutely guarantee if they kept everything close to their chests and things went tits up in a big way you would have droves of people apopleptic at how they put money into Motherwell every month but they weren't given the facts in the preceding months and years. What I genuinely don't see is that the club are making themselves look "miserable as fuck" as you put it. I actually find it amusing that you have suggested that when in the last couple of days there have been a swarm of opposition fans hammering the club for the stuff they've put about us finishing third and accusing us of over-celebrating. I agree it can be wearing when no sooner has one fundraising campaign concluded than the next is underway but over the piece I think they provide a fairly good flow of information to give an understanding of where things are at.

I can see this from both sides. If you'll pardon the pun you can only go to the well so many times and when there is a relatively limited number of us it is understandable that people may become weary of the message and stop listening. But that's not to say that the contents of the message is incorrect. Going back to the AGM for example I remember it being said that whilst the playing budget was raised for this season it was still reckoned to be second or third lowest in the league. Whilst they had reached a position where debts to former owner and directors were paid off they were still balancing the annual running of the club whilst trying to build some longer term contingency for bad seasons. Some times the message just isn't what we might want to hear. But I do think there's a fairly regular effort to "condition" supporters about the finances from both Robinson and the board so there isn't any complacency and people are still encouraged to join and continue to donate to the Well Society and are aware of the operating model. And to have the effect, or at least attempt to have the effect, of playing expectations down publicly too.

I didn't think it was as bad as I feared knowing what those programmes are all about and Stu92's forewarning. They can't be too far off being left with only cleaners and ticket office workers left to interview from Ferry's time at Parkhead. I've always quite enjoyed Ferry's one-on-one interviews but the shows with Slane and Kyle began to grate pretty quickly. But without necessarily going into great detail there's a fair bit beyond the transfer - Tony Watt, Stephen Robinson, chat about his progression through the youths and so on. I can't say I really picked up any change of pitch when Turnbull was talking about the transfer, but to be honest I don't notice any change of pitch when he's excited either. He does, as he has suggested in a couple of interviews, come across to me as quite chilled and easy oasy about everything good or bad. If there's any criticism to be levelled about the frequency of discussions of the breakdown of his transfer then perhaps some of that should be directed to Motherwell for the production documentary, which whilst I thought it was excellent, is in no small part a sales tool. Keeping The Ball on the Ground is a discussion by Old Firm-centric people for a largely Old Firm-centric audience and I think that has to be kept in mind.

Thanks for the clarification. I have to admit if there are those deflecting I'm not picking up on it. They do say your social media accounts become something of an echo chamber so it is entirely possible that view just isn't one reflected in the accounts I follow and the views expressed. I see plenty of people making reasoned arguments that we make moves to restart sooner, plenty of people making reasoned arguments that move to restart later. I don't see anyone trying to hid from the issue however. From my own perspective I don't think it unreasonable to consider how we move on, short, medium and long term in all facets of life economy included. An appreciation is required that such considerations are however going to come at different times for different people. That's going to vary markedly from someone in Government tasked with kick-starting "normality" to someone quite content to be picking up 80% of their salary sitting in the sun; from someone who has lost their job as a consequence of the financial issues to someone who is providing care at first hand. I will have a preference on what route to the "new normal" I think is best of course but I don't have any issue with anyone expressing various approaches even if I don't agree with them, your own view included. What I did however take issue with your initial remark that folk are twats for suggesting that saving lives is more important than the economy. Frankly that came across as callous and cretinous and in my view added nothing to your argument. You've provided clarification but I would suggest it was a poor choice of phrase and your point could have been made equally well without it.

Can you be specific on who you consider is using such chat to deflect away from the issues? Who are "the ones" you refer to?